LoSHA
crowdsourced #MeToo list of sexual harassers
LoSHA (an abbreviation of List of Sexual Harassers in Academia) was a crowdsourced list of sexual harassers in academia that was compiled in 2017 by Raya Sarkar, a law student studying at UC Davis School of Law. This list, published on Sarkar's Facebook page with the intention of a cautionary list rather than for institutional action, was cited to have marked the advent of the #MeToo movement in India.
Sarkar received death threats within days of publishing the list which included professors from renowned institutions including Indian Institute of Technology (Bhubaneswar) and Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Fourteen notable feminists including Nivedita Menon and Kavita Krishnan also published a statement expressing dismay over the list, citing a commitment to due process.
References
External links
Nair, Supriya (12 October 2018). "#MeToo is anarchic, and that's a good thing". Livemint.com. Retrieved 25 October 2018.
"#MeToo: Corporate India is complicit and the time is up". Cnbctv18.com.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “LoSHA” is crowdsourced #MeToo list of sexual harassers. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through LoSHA, crowdsourced and MeToo, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “crowdsourced #MeToo list of sexual harassers” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 10, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q60748096. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2017 and 2018.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “LoSHA”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow LoSHA primary sources, LoSHA archive and LoSHA research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “LoSHA”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “LoSHA” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.